Prominent Politics and Philosophy

Tag Archives: economy

Kim Jong-un, the egocentric megalomaniac, has recently declared nuclear war against South Korea and, consequently, America and all those who wish to support America. The nation then went one step further in restarting recent nuclear power facilities which could be running within a year, thus leading to a major international crisis as the North Korea threat now moves from idle to substantial.

One of the primary concerns with North Korea was whether the bellicose rhetoric would be followed by action, and it certainly has done. Recently releasing the statement on the state controlled news network, Rodong Sinmun, a spokesperson said:

The on-going do-or-die battle is a just and patriotic war to settle accounts with the U.S. and the south Korean puppet forces with arms of Songun, not with words.

Which is obviously a huge cause for concern. North Korea have argued that this aggression has been born out of a response to the increasing military presence of the American’s in the South. Indeed, America have been running drills, but with the recent activity from the North it is somewhat justified. It seems, therefore, that much of this military aggression does, in fact, derive from Kim Jong-Un’s desire to prove himself to a cabinet. A new leader with a huge – albeit propagated – legacy to fulfil, he has to in some way prove himself. Certainly, his recent actions will have amounted to much commendation from his cabinet, and with the yearly “financial figures” being released, it seems that Kim is doing pretty well in the role.

America’s response is commendable, however. Yes, a military presence has increased and they have released a statement formerly stating that they would defend the South as much as possible; but one should not neglect the truly diplomatic response they have taken to the issue. For instance, in Libya, Syria, Egypt, and Israel, throwing money and weaponry appeared to be the logical foreign policy; yet, in circumstances such as these, it appears they are taking a much more tentative approach – much unlike, for instance, the Cuban Missile Crisis.

North Korea went on to offer the promise that:

Whether it is the five islands of the West Sea, the areas along the Military Demarcation Line or other regions where the U.S. imperialists and the south Korean warmongers make a military provocation, that will develop into an all-out war and a nuclear war, not just confined to a local war. There is no doubt about it.

It appears that the threat is extremely serious and imminent. Unlike other shallow and idle threats, it appears that this one holds much weight and the presumed nature of Kim Jong-Un’s personality has only lived up to expectations.

It seems rather illogical for North Korea to attack South Korea, however, considering that a reported 38% of its exports is to the southern peninsula. A state of M.A.D seems to have been engaged and, as Ban Ki-Moon rightly asserts, the threat has “gone too far.”

I fear how far such rhetoric could go; not only the action side of things, but the implications on other nations. With Chinese officials condemning the actions anonymously, and Russia siding with America, it appears that support seems relatively strong. However, the recent military aid to Israel could cause hostility from Iran meaning they could, in theory, support North Korea. On the contrary, this is all outrageous speculation and relies on a number of outlandish factors.

The possibility of the weapons being utilised is obvious unpredictable but also unlikely. I think it’s just ongoing shadow boxing and will be suppressed in coming months by both condemnation of the international community and, perhaps, insurgency.

Obama, in a recent visit to Israel, declared a solemn obligation to the safety and security of Israel as a nation. As much as I respect Obama and support him and his policies, I find the nature of his support to Israel somewhat precarious. Indeed, the Palestine/Israel conflict is something that needs to be addressed and ameliorated, however I find issue in doing this by providing military assistance of anywhere up to an assumed £132 million – especially with such large debts.

However, the issue doesn’t solely concern economical factors for me. America has a large industry and has illustrated signs of growth under the Obama administration. What I do find difficult to comprehend is this, perhaps false, ideology of equality that Obama preaches in his own country regarding race, sex, and age, but then when in Israel he clearly defines his agenda and support for one nation. Instead of finding a resolution he’s evidently supporting an aggressive and hostile regime – I’m not suggesting that if he supported Palestine, he wouldn’t be supporting a belligerent regime, I just think aid and funding can be offered in other areas such as rebuilding infrastructure.

Moreover, I can’t understand Obama arguing against the Second Amendment – the right to bear arms – which endangers hundreds of citizens – I must clear up that I strongly disagree with the Second Amendment. He argues that a safer nature will be available if weapons are correctly and effectively managed and organised. Schools would be safer, streets would be safer, whole areas ridden with gun violence would be safer. Yet he contradicts and undermines his own argument by providing arms through the guise of aid to aggressive, war-ridden nations. The same was seen in Syria and Libya and it only exasperated deteriorating political conditions.

This leads me to question Obama as an individual; are there ulterior motives in his leadership? Is he the libertarian American longs for? Or does he just conform to a long line of militaristic Presidents intent upon expanding America beyond it’s already conquered lands. Another country bound by economic pressure of America would benefit the American’s massively and I wonder if Obama’s front is beginning to wear thin in his second term.

On the contrary, one might argue that Obama is simply trying to contain the mess which was created by previous administrations and that the effects are irreversible; however I think we have seen that this is not the case from the sheer magnitude of the money he has contributed. I fear the creation of another Al-Qaeda based group operating within Israel and Palestine.